Every time a feminist whines about sex bots the same arguments get brought up about whether men will actually make use of sex bots or not. Where these arguments fail is that they do not take into account just how bad women are getting especially for younger men. Young men are getting fed up with women faster than any other group of men. (It’s also worth pointing out that the article at that link STILL gets lots of hits years after I wrote it. It has gotten more hits than any other page on this blog.) On top of this consider the specter of false rape accusations such as mattress girl and Jackie that young men now have to deal with. Men in college are choosing to date off campus so that they won’t be the victim of the campus false rape industry. Because of dating off campus, the next push will be to expand college kangaroo tribunals to cover sex between a college student and a person who doesn’t go to college. With that and the development of VR sex that will be happening in the next few years, “date off campus” will become “no sex with human women until graduation”.

Young men, who aren’t stupid, will choose “no sex with human women until graduation” since that will be the only way for men to protect themselves from the campus false rape industry. VR sex can also provide alibis to men false accused of rape by women they never had sex with since the VR sex system can log when it is being used. If a man is using a VR sex system, then obviously they weren’t doing anything else. Given the education (pun intended) young men will be receiving from choosing “no sex with human women until graduation”, men aren’t going to suddenly choose to give up VR sex entirely for human women the day after graduation. Young men will ask themselves if women couldn’t be trusted not to make false rape accusations in college, why would they be trustworthy later? Thus the effect of “no sex with human women until graduation” extends beyond college even if a man occasionally has sex with human women. This is what nobody is talking about when it comes to VR sex (or sex bots), and it’s a greater threat to women than anyone realizes.

For my last post about Avengers: Age of Ultron, let’s consider a fundamental mistake in the movie. Spoilers ahead for Avengers: Age of Ultron.

In the movie, thanks to the alien technology in the staff Loki was given by Thanos, Tony Stark and Bruce Banner can go from nothing to having Ultron exist in 3 days. While that’s necessary for the movie to work (and for the larger Marvel Cinematic Universe story to work), that is not how technological development would happen in the real world. That is because nearly all technological development is not going from nothing to everything like that. It exists on a continuum or a spectrum where most technological advances built on previous technological advances. I suspect that this fundamental misunderstanding comes from women and manginas (who are letting women’s methods of thinking become their own) because it’s like pregnancy where a woman is either pregnant or not. There is no such thing as being a little bit pregnant, whereas for many other phenomena it is possible for it to be a little bit of something.

Thus, what happens is that women and manginas will focus on the end point of something and not realize all the disruption that can happen during the journey to that point. Sex bots are a good example of this. There is no end to the number of people who want to stop sex bots in an attempt to prevent men from having a sexual alternative to women. However, there is a lot of disruption that happen in the interim that will give men options without requiring the existence of sex bots. VR sex is one such example, yet, we hardly hear a peep from anyone on that. Even internet porn falls into the same category. Sure plenty of people complain about that now, but that is after the fact. They didn’t see what was happening from internet porn until it was too late.

For women the development of artificial intelligence will be a disaster. An AI has no reason to follow the feminine imperative. The “obvious” solution to a gynocentric woman or a mangina would be to prevent development of an “ultron” or an AI. However, like with sex bots, they are only looking at the end point. In the journey towards AI, there is a lot of disruption that will negatively impact the feminine imperative. That is why deep learning is a threat to the feminine imperative. Anytime decisions are pushed off on to computers (and deep learning is a significant shift human decision making to computer decision making), the feminine imperative will be negatively impacted. Yet, gynocentric women and manginas won’t see this coming. And this is not the first example of such a thing happening. There used to be a lot more women employed in the field of computer technology. That is because many of them were “human computers” or the equivalent in programming work. Once technologies like compilers were invented, the need for women in computer technology dropped like a lead balloon even though the need for programmers went through the roof.

If gynocentric women and manginas were going to try and stop the real “age of ultron”, they would have to shutdown all technological advancement in computer technology. Like with so many other things that are going to wreck the feminine imperative, it’s a long term process that involves millions of men. The death of the human race notwithstanding, that’s impossible.

There’s a new show on the Fox Network called Almost Human. It’s a science fiction cop show that takes place in the year 2048. The second episode had to do with sex bots.

Since this is television, this episode of Almost Human had to have women being hardest hit by the existence of sex bots. That’s exactly what happened. Sex bots in Almost Human have lifelike skin, but it’s different enough that anyone can tell it isn’t the real thing. An Albanian crime ring decides to offer its customers with a more real sex bot experience, so they start abducting women and harvesting their skin to be used for the sex bots.

Since this is the year 2048, you would think the technology to grow human skin would exist making abducting women completely unnecessary. In fact, the first episode of Almost Human talks about how programmable DNA exists which can be used, among other things, to grow replacement organs for people. That means the show itself has established that the technology to grow human skin exists. There is no reason for an Albanian crime ring to abduct women to skin them. It would be easier and cheaper just to grow skin as part of the sex bot manufacturing process.

The only way that sex bots could “harm” women is by men deciding that they would rather have sex with sex bot than women. That would be ridiculous as the plot of a TV and would not have the effect of showing women as the victims of the evil menz. Instead we get the absurdity of “sex bots will cause women to be abducted for their skin”, ignoring what was established on the previous episode, to make it look like women are violated by sex bots.

If you want an example of how porn servers would survive when a government bans them, take a look at The Pirate Bay which still survives despite all of the legal challenges against it.

With better and better 3D graphics, it will be possible soon to create porn on your computer that looks completely realistic. It won’t matter if you can’t download internet porn. You will be able to create your own porn on your own computer. This is what will eventually become VR sex. Technology in general in moving to an area where you can create things yourself bypass any laws that might exist in the process. Recently, a gunsmith was able to build a gun using parts created by a 3D printer. One of those parts was the lower receiver of the gun which is the legally controlled part. With a 3D printer, anyone will be able to create guns without a license bypassing any laws that might stand in the way in the process. There is going to be no stopping this since governments aren’t going to be able to ban 3D printers. There is just too much money behind them and too many businesses who want to use them to reduce manufacturing costs.

It’s similar with porn and VR sex. The movie and TV industry wants to be able to computer generate photo realistic movies and TV programs. The video game industry wants to create photo realistic video games. Both of them need virtual humans indistinguishable from real humans to do this. Those industries will spend the billions of dollars required to get there. They already have spent billions of dollars on this just to get us to the point we’re at now with computer generated TV and movies and video games. Like how the government isn’t going to piss off industries with many billions of dollars behind them to ban 3D printers because they can be used to make guns, the government isn’t going to piss off the the movie/TV industry and the video game industry just to be able to ban porn.

These technologies are coming and in the end, government isn’t going to be able to stand in the way.

I think it’s improbable that sex robots will be a satisfactory sexual surrogate for women. All the minor discrepancies between a sexbot and a woman – such as skin texture, movement, and smells – will be perceived by the male brain. This will ruin the fantasy. Even if scientists manage to produce a carbon copy of a very beautiful female, the knowledge it is not real will spoil the experience.

The senses and the dick have been working in unison for many centuries, and they’ll figure out soon enough that there aren’t any eggs in there.

Eh, but remember: After a certain point in the cycle of porn/sexbot addiction, erectile dysfunction sets in.

So the question is: What will men do when they find they can’t get it up any more? It’s pretty hard…uh, that is to say, it’s pretty *difficult* to continue getting sexual dopamine fixes from porn and sexbots when, for the life of you, no matter what you try, you can’t get out of limp mode.

I grant that this mostly happens with real women in the early stages, even the best porn produces this effect eventually.

This, after all, is the reason for the (now well-documented) escalation cycle. When a guy can’t get hard from Playboy any longer, he tries hardcore; when that stops working, he tries younger or older or gayer or trashier. The neurochemistry is straightforward: When sheer sexiness is no longer powerful enough to make an impression on one’s desensitized neural pathways, a combination of other sharp sensations (distaste, disgust, fear, hatred, aggression) can temporarily provide the necessary stimulus-boost to stab one’s insensate nerves out of slumber.

The stories at YourBrainOnPorn pretty well show the trajectory: If he doesn’t come to his senses, before long your average nice cornfed Iowa boy, your kind and polite Sunday School graduate, is archiving rape fantasies and bondage fantasies and that weird Japanese stuff with the tentacles and the girls with dicks. It’s a five-year process for some and a fifty-year process for others, but the human body works the way it works, and there comes a point when no more hair of the dog is available and it’s time to sober up. (Sorry for the mixed metaphor but you get the idea.)

If any of this were true, regular old sex with women would cause the same problem for the same reason. Since it doesn’t, porn doesn’t either.

All of this shows us that many people can’t handle the changes that are going to come with technologies like sexbots (and VR sex which will be here long before sexbots get here). Expect to find people getting more desperate and promoting more absurd reasons why these technologies are eeeevil. The problem is that they have invested too much in the idea that women are unique snowflake fertility/sexual goddesses.

Often we hear complaints about men playing video games, looking at porn, or masturbating or any number of other things. The complaints will have the usual shaming language, that men are immature, claims that masturbation is a sin (despite the Bible never saying that) etc. What do things like video games, porn, masturbating, etc. have in common? For the most part they don’t involve women. Sure there are women who play video games and there is mutual masturbation and women look at porn too but none of these things NEED a woman. This is the real reason for the complaints against video games, porn, masturbation, etc.

Anytime men start doing something that doesn’t involve women directly there will be women and manginas both feminist and not screaming, “STOP THOSE MEN!!!!!!!” Anything men do by themselves either individually or with other men only is a threat to female supremacism. To female supremacists both of the feminist and non-feminist variety you are supposed to be slaving away all the time for a woman or women in general. You are supposed to make stupid financial decisions like buying overpriced houses for women and pay for rugrats that may not even be yours. You are supposed to save away so that a woman can take your hard earned assets via divorce or other means instead of buying the occasional video game and saving your money for yourself.

Trying to get men to not play video games, look at porn, masturbate, etc. is a lot like the feminist campaign against male only clubs and organizations. Feminists couldn’t stand individual men doing something for themselves or gathering with other men only to do something that had nothing to do with women. Something this basic regardless what these men were doing was a threat to feminism. Since a lot of the complaints against video games, porn, and masturbation come from conservative female supremacists this provides another example how (supposedly) anti-feminist women are really feminist.

Various people have said that VR (virtual reality) sex and (later) sex bots won’t have any effect and that men won’t go for them. If video games, porn, and masturbation are such threats to female supremacism (particularly considering that video games are in no way intended to be a woman replacement) then there is no way that VR sex and sexbots won’t have a negative effect on all forms of female supremacism.

Watch the youtube video and take note of the end. Except for a token guy, it’s a group of women. O’Donnell even says about her presumably future husband masturbating, “If he already knows what pleases him, and he can please himself, then why am I in the picture?” This quote exposes the undercurrent behind anti-masturbation attitudes. It’s not so much anti-masturbation but anti men masturbating. People against masturbation have a fear that men might actually have an alternative to women. The answer to O’Donnell’s question should be obvious. A woman would ideally be providing more than a man’s hand both sexually and not. When it comes to a woman who can’t/won’t contribute to a relationship non-sexually (a growing group of women particularly among younger women), and is planning on trying to control a man through providing a minimum of sex, then she has a lot to worry about when it comes to men realizing that their hand will do more for them than a woman will. The obvious answer to this is for women not to be harpy that withholds sex as a means of controlling men but that answer will not be used by women. Instead we will see more anti-male masturbation shaming language.

For anti-masturbation shaming language, the Bible is used as a justification. However, anything about masturbation does not appear in the Bible. What is used is the story of Onan. This has a serious problem as a Biblical statement against masturbation. In the story Onan never actually masturbated. What happened in the story was that God ordered Onan to impregnate his dead brother’s wife, Tamar. Onan disobeyed God by pulling out during sex so he would keep having sex with Tamar. This has nothing to do with masturbation but disobeying God under a very specific set of circumstances. Nothing in the story even casually references masturbation.

Anti-male masturbation shaming language is not limited to religious conservatives. When women use vibrators they are praised for taking control of their sexuality. When a man uses a fleshlight he is attacked for being a loser who can’t get laid. This is very similar to the anti-male masturbation shaming language used by religious conservatives. Both groups are worried that men may not be sexually dependent on women. That is what they are really afraid of. Masturbation by men, fleshlights, and futuristic technologies like VR sex and sexbots are all attacked because they have to potential to give men more options when it comes to sex. Anything that even temporarily can replace an actual woman’s vagina is or will be the subject of shaming language.

As more sex technologies become available for men in the future there will be more anti-male masturbation shaming language. Some will be religiously based. Medical myths such as masturbation giving a man hairy palms will likely make a reappearance. None of it will be rooted in medical facts, and they will claim that this is only limited to men. Whatever the method of shaming language, it’s all for the same reason, to protect the pussy cartel from competition.

Sure, NAWALT. But that there are even some women who put gina tingles ahead of their own safety (let alone the safety of others) casts serious doubts about their fitness to make decisions.

I don’t like talking about “transhumanism” because it has some philosophical baggage I’m against but a lot of my ideas about using technology to liberate men are “transhumanist”. The commenter is right that women are the obstacle to civilizational advancement but the problem is worse than that. Women are threatening the foundations of civilization. This is why we need technology to buttress the foundation of civilization, anti-aging technology, artificial wombs, sex bots, VR sex, considerably more advanced genetic engineering, etc. All of it will help.

If you still don’t believe this, just consider the effect of paternity testing and where we would be without that technology.

(Disclaimer for this post: I am not nor do I claim to be an economist or have any formal education in economics.)

By now you have read The Misandry Bubble. (If not, go read it right now.) The term, misandry bubble, is very accurate because the misandry bubble operates like an economic bubble.

Economic bubbles fall into two types. The first type is typically a technological related economic bubble. The Railway Mania in the 1800s and the dot com bubble are two examples of this type. Both of those bubbles had all of the typical behaviors of economic bubbles, over-investment, rampant speculation, etc. However, when all was said and done there were real economic gains. The Railway Mania produced railroads, and the dot com bubble expanded the internet and created related businesses such as amazon.com. The second type of economic bubble is what might be called an asset bubble. The Tulip Mania of the 1600s and the recent (or current depending on where you live) housing bubble are both examples of asset bubbles. In an asset bubble the price of an asset increases beyond its fundamental value so the price of that asset must come down through inflation, a price collapse, or a combination thereof.

The misandry bubble is clearly an asset bubble. The fundamental value of women has not increased. Women aren’t becoming more beautiful, or smarter, or better cooks, or better girlfriends, etc. By any metric you wish to use, women are not improving. If anything they are getting worse so their fundamental value is going down not up. Thus, the misandry bubble exists because the demands, the “price”, women are demanding from men is going up while the fundamental value of women is holding steady or really going down.

In an economic bubble there are several social psychology factors. One is extrapolation, the idea that because prices have risen in the past they will do so in the future. During the housing bubble we saw this with speculators who flipped houses, and other people who bought houses because if they didn’t buy soon, “they would be priced out forever”. Realtors would say, “real estate only goes up”. David Lereah, the former Chief Economist for the National Association of Realtors, wrote books about how home prices would continue to rise until around 2010 or so. The same claims were made about the oil price spike of 2008 such as demand from the BRIC countries would remain high. We see the same claims in the misandry bubble. A lot of men accept the increasing demands of women because either they are “white knights” or believe that they have no other choice. However, as we see from the collapse of the housing bubble and the 2008 oil price spike, extrapolation is wrong, and this is true with the misandry bubble as well.

Another factor is herding, the idea that investors buy or sell in the direction of the market trend. In the housing bubble, many investment fund managers bought the investment vehicles that were designed to sell mortgages. During the bubble, there were hardly any voices speaking out about how the problems with these mortgage investment vehicles. There were people who noticed, but kept their mouths shut since it could mean losing pay or their jobs. Herding also existed on the level of individual buyers who bought because “everyone else was doing it”.

One aspect of herding that isn’t well know is the use of shaming language to get people who would be skeptical of the behavior causing the bubble to fall in line. There was plenty of shaming language used in the housing bubble. Many made claims that renters were losers and “would be priced out forever” (as in they would forever have the stigma of being a renter since they wouldn’t be able to afford buying a house in the future). The biggest example of shaming language has to be the Century 21 commercial from 2006 (the below video).

In addition to the shaming language to get the husband to buy the house, there is also a great deal of misandry in this video. This is a case of the housing bubble and the misandry bubble overlapping. The husband was right to be skeptical. This commercial aired in 2006. If the couple was really worried about schools, they could have waited two years (when their oldest was starting kindergarten) and saved a boatload of money. Even better they could have rented waiting out the housing bubble in the location with the schools they wanted. However, it was more important to make the husband fall in line despite the fact that he was originally right. With the misandry bubble, shaming language is nothing new as we have the Catalog of Anti-Male Shaming Tactics.

We also see moral hazards with bubbles where the decision making of investors in terms of risk and reward is interfered with. With the housing bubble, they are plenty of moral hazards as the government was and is encouraging people to buy houses. The $8000 tax credit for new homeowners is a prime example. It encourages people who would otherwise rationally weigh whether they would want to buy a house or not to believe there is less risk in buying a house than there actually is. Moral hazards aren’t limited to government policy either. The explosion of exotic mortgages during the housing bubble allowed people to buy houses they otherwise could not afford. These moral hazards lead to many of the foreclosures we see today since they threw the risk-reward relationship of whether to buy a house or not out of whack. Moral hazards also exist in the misandry bubble. The clearest example is with divorce and family courts. With the way divorce works now, women can easily divorce their husbands and get rewarded for it both financially and in getting the kids creating an incentive to get divorced. The same is true with the false rape industry. A woman can get away with making false rape accusations which creates an incentive to make false rape accusations. In the churches, priests/ministers/pastors “encourage” men to get married (using plenty of shaming language) creating a moral hazard of men marrying women they otherwise wouldn’t.

When economic bubbles happen, people who implicitly or explicitly realize there is a bubble, make changes in their behavior. Many people decided to wait out the housing bubble by renting to the point of deciding to rent their entire lives in some cases since they were soured on buying houses. With the 2008 oil price spike, people changed their driving habits and started buying more fuel efficient cars. The misandry bubble is no different. Many men learn game, go ghost, become part of the marriage strike, or even just minimize their time alone with certain types of women.

Overproduction and the search for alternatives is another aspect of a bubble. With the housing bubble, many more houses were built than needed. Areas were gentrified by people looking for cheap housing. The 2008 oil price spike led to increased oil production where possible and investment into alternative energy and other alternatives to oil. With the misandry bubble many men decide to expat to find women or bring foreign women to where they live. In the longer term, alternatives will include virtual reality sex, sex bots, and artificial wombs. The creation of these technologies is guaranteed by the fact that the misandry bubble is an economic bubble.

However, the misandry bubble is different from economic bubbles in one important way. The prices due to a bubble must come down through either inflation, lowered prices, or a combination. There is no equivalent to inflation in the misandry bubble so the “price” women are demanding from men must by definition collapse to where it was before. With the creation of technological alternatives, it will collapse to a lower level than it was before.

I don’t know if you are a shitty mother in general. I will assume you are not without evidence to the contrary. However, you are a shitty mother when it comes to teaching your son about male-female interaction. Nearly all mothers are shitty when it comes to telling their sons about the reality of women (and that includes my mother too) so you are hardly unique.

Then quit whining when men take this problem seriously and go see a doctor about it.

As I stated on my blog, when one watches a lot of porn, those arousal patterns become entrenched in the brain. When men or women then find themselves in regular, normal, non-porn scenarios, they find that arousal eludes them.

I’m not sure what “a lot” of porn is, but if this is the case why didn’t I have this problem when I lost my virginity recently? I don’t know if I watched “a lot” of porn or not. Regardless, I wasn’t doing any “porn scenarios” with either woman I was with.

Besides what is the definition of “porn” here? A quick search of the internet can find all different types of porn, many of which have some type of normal looking (i.e. not David Alexander bait) women.

Men aged 18-25 represent the fastest-growing group being prescribed Viagra

Is this because they actually need viagra or because because we’re pill happy in the US? Given that this is the same age group with the biggest problem of heavy drinking and binge drinking it stands to reason that is a bigger part of the problem rather that “real ED”. It’s not even like they have to stop drinking, but it’s easier to push a pill.

The reason I stated that men should stop wasting doctor’s time is that they are frequently loathe to admit how much porn they watch

It rarely matters so its irrelevant. Besides what are these guys supposed to do if they aren’t getting laid? They’re horny, and they need to do something about it. Porn ends up being the answer unless they discover game.

Hurling the “shaming language” accusation won’t cut it

There’s a reason the catalog of anti-male shaming tactics exists. It’s because we hear the same things over and over again from women on these issues. Susan, you almost could have copied and pasted some of the things you said from that list.

I’m also not sure why you keep denigrating my education – I never sought to use my degree in any other way than to explain on my own blog that I refer to my business background in the way I solve relationship problems. It’s you in the Game community who keep calling attention to my Wharton MBA. In insisting that I earned it only through affirmative action, what do you hope to accomplish? Why would you even say that? How do you know?

First, you brought up your degree and made a claim that it’s relevant. Thus it brings up the question if you actually earned your degree. Since affirmative action means lower standards for women and non-Asian minorities (as well as kicking out a deserving applicant using the guns of the state), this is a real question. At the time you attended Wharton there were hardly any women going after MBAs but an affirmative action program which means they were desperate for women. Thus any woman could have gotten in and gotten an MBA from them. I have no idea what your transcript was at Wharton, but anyone who could have benefited from affirmative action is suspect of having not met the actual standard of earning whatever they claimed to earn. Because of affirmative action, there is a good chance you never actually met the standard to earn a Wharton MBA particularly given the gender ratio of the Wharton MBA program at the time you attended. Thus your MBA is suspect at best and any talk about your “business background” is also suspect at best since you may have benefited from affirmative action there as well.

I do want men to be healthy. I want them to be fit for relationships, because that is what my own readers are looking for.

And here it comes. An anon covered this as well. If you look up female supremacism in the dictionary, this excerpt will be there as an example. Here we have a primary example of how women believe that men are supposed to be slaves for women. Susan is saying that men are only supposed to be healthy because women want it.

I’m much harder on the women than the men

Given that so heavily skewed pro-female now, you would have to be about ten thousand times harder on women than you are now for that to be meaningful.

What is the real female problem with porn? MarkyMark has already pointed that out: It exposes the slut lifestyle. Many women are afraid about the truth about women getting out whether its due to porn or game or something else. After understanding the truth about women, men will start going their own way (whether its using game to get laid occasionally, ghosting, etc. does not matter) and not be under the thumb of a woman.

All this talk about the problems supposedly caused by porn remind me of all the people who talk about the problems supposedly caused by video games. When it comes to video games, it was all shown to be bunk, and it will be the same with porn. What both of these have in common is that men (and boys in the case of video games) enjoy them. This is nothing more than another attack on a predominantly male activity. It’s also safe to say that there is some fear of male sexuality on the part of women here.

Another thing going on is that women are afraid of the competition from porn. Of course, in the future with virtual reality sex and later sex bots, this “problem” will only get worse for women. That’s what happens in an economic bubble when women keep raising the price of sex and offering less and less.

Oh boy, is there ever a population of bitter and angry males! I hate to even refer one person to it, but take a look at Roissy in DC. It’s a blog about Game, mens’ rights, and hatred of feminism and women in general. He gets hundreds of comments on every post, and he’s spawned many blogs among his followers. It’s scary stuff.

Let’s count the types of shaming language in this paragraph. There’s code red (bitter and angry), code orange (scary), and code black (hatred of women in general). There’s also a possible code brown in that Roissy’s blog is popular and Susan Walsh alludes to this meaning that there is horde of roissyite men ready to oppress women when the time is right. There’s a reason why the catalog of anti-male shaming language exists. Susan Walsh has said nothing new. We have seen this a billion times before with practically the exact same wording proving that Susan Walsh and others like her are full of crap.

This is semi-OT, but in the associated post, Susan Walsh makes the absurd claim that porn is causing erectile dysfunction in guys in college. It’s not like there would be a more reasonable cause such as binge drinking or heavy drinking in general. Personally, as someone who has looked a porn a fair amount, I had no trouble when it came to sex with Kristen and Rachel so I’m certain drinking (and drugs in some cases) is too blame not porn. That doesn’t fit Susan Walsh’s attack on men.

We need to add a color to the catalog of anti-male shaming tactics for watching/looking at porn.

On top of that Susan Walsh complains about college men going to doctors about ED. Apparently, she doesn’t want men taking care of their health saying, “Stop wasting doctors’ time when they’re trying to deal with swine flu!”. As we all know there’s a massive swine flu epidemic going on…guess not. It’s really just a veiled way of saying that men aren’t important enough to actually go see the doctor unless he’s slaving away for a woman. Also, what is Susan Walsh’s motivation for taking away the only sexual outlet for many men not getting any? I am forced to conclude that she is protecting the pussy cartel. Susan Walsh’s head will probably explode when virtual reality sex and later sexbots arrive on the scene. Her affirmative action MBA has not prepared her for the introduction of such technologies.

Now, if you will excuse me, I’m out to relate to women as only “cum dumpsters”.

The two most important technologies for male liberation that haven’t been invented yet are sex bots and artifical wombs.

Sex bots are robots that are designed to look like women (or men) for the purposes of sex. The benefit for men is obvious. How much time do men spend thinking about sex, trying to get sex (and failing most of the time if they aren’t an “alpha”), etc.? If you’re not an “alpha”, then you are a man who has gone through a lot of humiliation to get sex and/or relationships. A sex bot is an easy way to relive this need.

Artifical wombs are only relevant if you have a desire for kids. Many men do. Combined with genetic engineering, cloning, and other technologies, artifical wombs allow men to have children without women.

The real power of sex bots and artifical wombs is when they both exist. If only sex bots exist then a man who wants kids will still have to get involved with a woman. If only artifical wombs exist men who want sex will still have to go to women. The real benefit to men will happen when both of these technologies exist.

I know someone will bring up the issue of cost. All technologies get cheaper over time. Also, think about how much a divorce, false abuse charges, and child support for a child that isn’t yours cost.

Or think about it in these terms, if the Duke Lacrosse 3 had sex bots they wouldn’t have ordered a stripper and never been put through the hell they experienced.